RE: stds-802-handoff: Par 5 Criteria Text

[<Michael.G.Williams@nokia.com>]

Hi DJ,

Could we express the security portion of the scope in a more "positive" way, instead of : 

Consideration will be made to ensure that compatibility is maintained
with 802 security mechanisms including 802.1x. Neither security
algorithms nor security protocols shall be defined in the specification.

Something like:

Security of the mechanisms defined in this standard will be as strong as the mechanisms of the individual 802 technologies. 

Without a comprehensive matrix, we can't say that all the technologies offer the same security at L2, or even equivalent security. It might be that information exchange between two technologies will involve a reduction in security. It might be appropriate for this standard to provide indicators that such a change in security is occurring. This could be construed as a security algorithm or protocol.

Best Regards,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Johnston, Dj [mailto:dj.johnston@intel.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:53 PM
To: stds-802-handoff@ieee.org
Subject: stds-802-handoff: Par 5 Criteria Text



I would like us to make some progress on the text of the PAR and 5
criteria.
So far I have thought up text for 4 critera and I welcome input on those
or suggestions for the remaining one (economic feasibility).

We have agreed on draft text for the purpose and scope with the
intention of tweaking on this reflector and approving them in Denver.

So here they are as they currently stand. The text inserted in the PAR
form is encapsulated in [] to distinguish it from the PAR form text:

Scope
-----
[
The scope of this project is to develop a standard that shall define
mechanisms that may be adopted into implementations so that handoff of
handoff-capable upper layer entities, e.g. MobileIP sessions, can be
optimized between homogeneous or heterogeneous media types both wired
and wireless, where handoff is not otherwise defined.
Consideration will be made to ensure compatibility with the 802
architectural model.
Consideration will be made to ensure that compatibility is maintained
with 802 security mechanisms including 802.1x. Neither security
algorithms nor security protocols shall be defined in the specification.
]

Purpose
-------
[
The purpose of the project is to
	a) facilitate the optimization of handoff between networks that
may be of different media types both wired and wireless, where 802 level
handoff is not otherwise defined 
	b) to make it possible for mobile devices to perform seamless
handoff where the network environment supports it.
This will improve the user experience of mobile devices by improving the
available network coverage through the support of multiple media types
and preventing the interruption of upper layer sessions during handoff.
]

5 Criteria
----------
Criteria #1: Broad Market Potential
A standards project authorized by IEEE 802 shall have a broad market
potential. Specifically, it shall have the potential for:

a) Broad sets of applicability.
[
An 802 handoff standard would be applicable to 802 media types, both
wired and wireless. For example handoff between 802.3 and 802.11 within
a single device is a plausible application of such a standard.
]

b) Multiple vendors and numerous users.
[
A key requirement for generalized seamless handoff is that handoff can
occur between administrative domains, and between different
technologies. Thus the standard will be applicable to vendors of network
services as well as vendors of multiple equipment types.
A wide variety of vendors currently build numerous wired and wireless
products for the network equipment market segments.  It is expected that
the majority of those vendors, and others, will participate in the
standards development process and subsequent commercialization
activities.
]

c) Balanced costs (LAN versus attached stations).
[
The likely mechanisms through which 802 handoff can be achieved are
message passing protocols that are implemented within 802 compatible
devices. Handoff mechanisms common in existing mobile systems, such as
802.11 and cellular systems indicate that software will be the most
common implementation medium for these protocols. This is unlikely to
represent a major factor in the unit cost of networking devices adopting
a handoff standard, whether for LAN equipment or attached stations.
]

Criteria #2: Compatibility
IEEE 802 defines a family of standards. All standards shall be in
conformance with the IEEE 802.1 Architecture, Management and
Interworking documents as follows: 802. Overview and Architecture,
802.1D, 802.1Q and parts of 802.1f. If any variances in conformance
emerge, they shall be thoroughly disclosed and reviewed with 802.
Each standard in the IEEE 802 family of standards shall include a
definition of managed
objects which are compatible with systems management standards.
[
The proposed standard is contrained by its scope to maintain
compatibility with the 802 architecture. The work of the 802 Handoff
ECSG has failed identified any potential conflicts with the 802
architecture. 
]

Criteria #3: Distinct Identity
Each IEEE 802 standard shall have a distinct identity. To achieve this,
each authorized
project shall be:
a) Substantially different from other IEEE 802 standards.
b) One unique solution per problem (not two solutions to a problem).
c) Easy for the document reader to select the relevant specification.
[
There are no handoff standards in 802 that are focussed on facilitating
optimized handoff of entities above the LLC by providing the necessary
services and information within the MAC or PHY. 
]

Criteria #4: Technical Feasibility
For a project to be authorized, it shall be able to show its technical
feasibility. At a minimum, the proposed project shall show:
a) Demonstrated system feasibility.
[
Handoff is a common mechanism, present in many systems such as cell
phones or 802.11 ESSs. Mobile IP, in both v4 and v6 forms, has shown
that roaming across heterogeneous systems is possible. Work in the IEFT
SEAMOBY and TRIGTRAN projects has highlighted the need for greater
interaction between 802 MAC and PHY layers and a roaming layer 3 in
order to coordinate smoother, faster handoffs. Accordingly it is clear
that roaming within the confines of different 802 technologies is
feasible and that approaches that might be adopted for roaming at higher
layers are feasible. Since the IETF has published in draft form, a role
that 802 networks can play in higher level of handoff it is clear that
it is possible incorporate such mechanisms into the 802 framework.
]
b) Proven technology, reasonable testing.
[
The proven ability to handoff within 802.11 networks, within cell phone
networks and within the internet, using mobile IP has proved a minimum
set of capabilities for roaming technologies.
The nature of message passing protocols is such that the timing and
passage of the messages is subject to observation and testing. Methods
of testing interruptions to established sessions while being handed over
(such as voice bearers) are well established in telephony and VoIP
practices. 
]
c) Confidence in reliability.
[
Mobile IP, cellular systems and 802.11 provide real world examples of
reliable handoff mechanisms using diverse techniques. Thus it is
feasiblr for 802 handoff mechanims to also be reliable.
]

Criteria #5 Economic Feasibility
For a project to be authorized, it shall be able to show economic
feasibility (so far as can reasonably be estimated), for its intended
applications. At a minimum, the proposed project shall show:
a) Known cost factors, reliable data.
b) Reasonable cost for performance.
c) Consideration of installation costs.
[ TBD ]


Thanks,
DJ

David Johnston
Intel Corporation
Chair, IEEE 802 Handoff ECSG

Email : dj.johnston@intel.com
Tel   : 503 380 5578 (Mobile)
Tel   : 503 264 3855 (Office)